35L and 135L vs. 24-70 II, when used with 70-200

bobbyz wrote in post #15243195
If 24-70 II did this easily I would get it for sure as more flexible for what I shoot. But I don't think you get the same look at f2.8 IMHO.

IMO, the 24-70 can replicate that or get very close to it.

Charlie wrote in post #15244359
IMO, the 24-70 can replicate that or get very close to it.

f2 vs f2.8, I don't think. And not to mention 35L can do f1.4.

bobbyz wrote in post #15244935
f2 vs f2.8, I don't think. And not to mention 35L can do f1.4.

F2, it cant, but the reason you do F2 in your photos is for thin DOF, and 70 @F2.8 can definitely acheive the look.... sort of. It cant do 1.4 for sure, but the images it can produce arent far behind, not to mention the flexibility is way ahead.

To the OP

Based on the information you provided selling the primes for the zoom makes a lot of sense.

I don't have a FF nor a 70-200mm MKII (a crop and a MK1). Based on my equipment if I got the MKII, I still could not get rid of my 135L. Its size (length and weight) and color make it a viable option where Big and white would not work. But that does not seem to be your problem, and you say your 135L sits and you use the 35L at 2.8 or above.

Do the switch, it is almost a no brain-er for you (unless you left something in your description out).

Charlie wrote in post #15244961
F2, it cant, but the reason you do F2 in your photos is for thin DOF, and 70 @F2.8 can definitely acheive the look.... sort of. It cant do 1.4 for sure, but the images it can produce arent far behind, not to mention the flexibility is way ahead.

70mm is not 35mm. By that logic I don't need 24-70 either, can use my 70-200mm f2.8.

Reason I am using f2 is as lens is lot more sharper at f2 compared to f1.4.

If your not one of those whiners who complain about lens weighting too much I would go for the 24-70 MkII in a split second. Yes, its heavy but so what...go get a better neck strap. This is the sharpest lens I own and use it probably 80%-90% of the time. If I could only have one lens to pick from everything I own it would be this one for sure.

snowblower wrote in post #15247036
If your not one of those whiners who complain about lens weighting too much I would go for the 24-70 MkII in a split second. Yes, its heavy but so what...go get a better neck strap. This is the sharpest lens I own and use it probably 80%-90% of the time. If I could only have one lens to pick from everything I own it would be this one for sure.

lol i use 70-200 frequently on my 5D3 with a grip.. don't have any weight issues.

I'd keep the 35L simply for low light capabilities. There are situations where an intimate ambient light photo would be killed by using flash because f/2.8 is too slow.

If your shooting events its a no brainer to own a 24-70Lmk2.

dmcharg wrote in post #15248706
If your not using the 35L/135L then sell them. I used to own 35/85/135 but moved to the 24-70/70-200. I prefer the flexibility of the zooms and 2.8 is fast enough for my needs and still allows for a decent dof. No regrets at all.

I'm in the same boat of zooms over primes. it's very hard to pry my zoom off of my camera, and I find that I get decent enough DOF with my zoom... I usually shoot F2 and up because below is too thin for the working space I'm using. No doubt the 1.2 has amazing light gathering abilities, it's just not as flexible as the FL of the zoom. Since I always carry a flash, the light gathering ability is marginalized even further.

That said, I have no intentions of getting rid of my sole L prime.